International Consultant for Midterm Review of Biodiversity & Tourism Project


Localidad : Praia, Cabo Verde
Fecha límite de postulación :12-Aug-19 (Medianoche Nueva York, Estados Unidos)
Tipo de contrato :Individual Contract
Nivel de puesto :International Consultant
Idiomas requeridos :
Inglés   Español   Portugués
Fecha de comienzo del contrato :
(Fecha en que se espera que comience el candidato seleccionado)
26-Aug-2019
Duración del contrato inicial :32 work days
Duración esperada del puesto :32 work days between August and December 2019

El PNUD está comprometido con lograr la diversidad de su personal en términos de género, nacionalidad y cultura. Se alienta por igual a las personas que pertenecen a grupos minoritarios, a pueblos indígenas o que tienen alguna discapacidad a presentar su candidatura. Todas las solicitudes se tratarán con la mayor confidencialidad.

UNDP no tolera la explotación y el abuso sexual, ningún tipo de acoso, incluido el acoso sexual, ni la discriminación. Por lo tanto, todos los candidatos seleccionados serán sometidos a una rigurosa verificación de referencias y antecedentes.


Antecedentes

N.B.

Applications through UNDP jobs will not be accepted, only to the procurement.cv@cv.jo.un.org email address.

Interested candidates are required to read the Procurement Notice for Individual Consultants and its related documents, which are available in the following websites:

Introduction:

This is the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the UNDP-GEF Midterm Review (MTR) of the full-sized project titled “Mainstreaming biodiversity conservation into the tourism sector in synergy with a further strengthened protected areas system in Cabo Verde” (PIMS 4256) implemented through the national Directorate of Environment / Ministry of Agriculture and Environment, which is to be undertaken in 2019. The project GEF CEO Endorsement date is 23 November 2015, and PRODOC signature occurred on 19 September 2016. The project is in its third year of implementation. In line with the UNDP-GEF Guidance on MTRs, this MTR process was initiated before the submission of the second Project Implementation Report (PIR). This ToR sets out the expectations for this MTR. The MTR process must follow the guidance outlined in the document Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects (http://web.undp.org/evaluation/documents/guidance/GEF/midterm/Guidance_Midterm%20Review%20_EN_2014.pdf )).


Project Background

The project was designed to safeguard globally significant biodiversity in Cabo Verde from current and emerging threats, by enhancing the enabling and regulatory frameworks in the tourism sector and activating a critical further subset of the national protected areas system.

Cabo Verde has set ambitious targets for the expansion of its tourism industry. The achievement of these targets relies on long term competitiveness, which for a significant proportion of the tourism on offer depends on good environmental quality standards and the effective conservation of the country’s landscape and biodiversity assets. This project support ‘mainstreaming’ biodiversity considerations into the tourism sector, while strengthening the conservation of Cabo Verde’s important biodiversity by operationalizing a critical new subset of Protected Areas (PAs). These are located in four priority islands – Santiago, Sal, Boa Vista and Maio – where immediate pressure is greatest and urgent action is required that can be replicated more widely in the future.

Under Component 1 the project will develop and put into place coherent and effective enabling frameworks (i.e. legal, policy, regulatory and institutional) for enhanced multi-sectoral strategic land-use planning at the landscape level, focusing on the tourism and associated real estate/construction sectors. The project supports the development of new national standards on sustainable tourism and the uptake of international certification systems that are aligned with Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria while promoting destination-based sustainable tourism standards and their operationalization. It will also help define economic/fiscal and other incentives and penalties to advance the adherence of private sector and local community businesses to best-practice standards and related certification systems. Under Component 2, the project will spearhead the operationalization of 8 PAs based on the development of management and ecotourism plans and associated regulations. The identification of new potential MPA sites for inclusion in the national PA system will also be supported, as well as the definition and piloting of co-management and conflict resolution mechanisms. Cost-effective PA revenue generation mechanisms will be developed and tested in conjunction with tourism sector stakeholders. An environmental monitoring program to track the impacts of tourism and fisheries in PAs will be installed and Information Education and Communication (IEC) campaigns implemented to promote the role of PAs and sustainable tourism in Cabo Verde.

The Project is implemented by the national Directorate of Environment in collaboration whit the General Directorate of Tourism and Transport.  The Total Project Cost is estimated as 3,664,640 USD from GEF and 10,047,191 of co-financing (including 450,000 USD from UNDP, 5,266,431 USD from Government of Cabo Verde-Grant, 4,275,760 USD from the Government of Cabo Verde-In kind, and 55,000 USD from Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo /AECID).


Deberes y responsabilidades

The MTR team will assess the following four categories of project progress. See the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for extended descriptions.

i.    Project Strategy

Project design:

  •  Review the problem addressed by the project and the underlying assumptions.  Review the effect of any incorrect assumptions or changes to the context to achieving the project results as outlined in the Project Document.
  • Review the relevance of the project strategy and assess whether it provides the most effective route towards expected/intended results.  Were lessons from other relevant projects properly incorporated into the project design?
  • Review how the project addresses country priorities. Review country ownership. Was the project concept in line with the national sector development priorities and plans of the country?
  • Review decision-making processes: were perspectives of those who would be affected by project decisions, those who could affect the outcomes, and those who could contribute information or other resources to the process, taken into account during project design processes?
  • Review the extent to which relevant gender issues were raised in the project design. See Annex 9 of Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects for further guidelines.
  • If there are major areas of concern, recommend areas for improvement.

Results Framework/Logframe:

  • Undertake a critical analysis of the project’s logframe indicators and targets, assess how “SMART” the midterm and end-of-project targets are (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound), and suggest specific amendments/revisions to the targets and indicators as necessary.
  • Are the project’s objectives and outcomes or components clear, practical, and feasible within its time frame?
  • Examine if progress so far has led to, or could in the future catalyse beneficial development effects (i.e. income generation, gender equality and women’s empowerment, improved governance etc...) that should be included in the project results framework and monitored on an annual basis.
  • Ensure broader development and gender aspects of the project are being monitored effectively.  Develop and recommend SMART ‘development’ indicators, including sex-disaggregated indicators and indicators that capture development benefits.

ii.    Progress Towards Results

Progress Towards Outcomes Analysis:

  • Review the logframe indicators against progress made towards the end-of-project targets using the Progress Towards Results Matrix and following the Guidance For Conducting Midterm Reviews of UNDP-Supported, GEF-Financed Projects; colour code progress in a “traffic light system” based on the level of progress achieved; assign a rating on progress for each outcome; make recommendations from the areas marked as “Not on target to be achieved” (red).

Table. Progress Towards Results Matrix (Achievement of outcomes against End-of-project Targets) (see table in the TOR)

Indicator Assessment Key

Green= Achieved

Yellow= On target to be achieved

Red= Not on target to be achieved

 

In addition to the progress towards outcomes analysis:

  • Compare and analyse the GEF Tracking Tool at the Baseline with the one completed right before the Midterm Review.

  • Identify remaining barriers to achieving the project objective in the remainder of the project.

  • By reviewing the aspects of the project that have already been successful, identify ways in which the project can further expand these benefits.

    iii.   Project Implementation and Adaptive Management

Management Arrangements:

  • Review overall effectiveness of project management as outlined in the Project Document.Have changes been made and are they effective?Are responsibilities and reporting lines clear?Is decision-making transparent and undertaken in a timely manner?Recommend areas for improvement.

  • Review the quality of execution of the Executing Agency/Implementing Partner(s) and recommend areas for improvement.

  • Review the quality of support provided by the GEF Partner Agency (UNDP) and recommend areas for improvement.

    Work Planning:

  • Review any delays in project start-up and implementation, identify the causes and examine if they have been resolved.

  • Are work-planning processes results-based?If not, suggest ways to re-orientate work planning to focus on results?

  • Examine the use of the project’s results framework/ logframe as a management tool and review any changes made to it since project start.

    Finance and co-finance:

  • Consider the financial management of the project, with specific reference to the cost-effectiveness of interventions.

  • Review the changes to fund allocations as a result of budget revisions and assess the appropriateness and relevance of such revisions.

  • Does the project have the appropriate financial controls, including reporting and planning, that allow management to make informed decisions regarding the budget and allow for timely flow of funds?

  • Informed by the co-financing monitoring table to be filled out, provide commentary on co-financing: is co-financing being used strategically to help the objectives of the project? Is the Project Team meeting with all co-financing partners regularly in order to align financing priorities and annual work plans?

    Project-level Monitoring and Evaluation Systems:

  • Review the monitoring tools currently being used:Do they provide the necessary information? Do they involve key partners? Are they aligned or mainstreamed with national systems?Do they use existing information? Are they efficient? Are they cost-effective? Are additional tools required? How could they be made more participatory and inclusive?

  • Examine the financial management of the project monitoring and evaluation budget.Are sufficient resources being allocated to monitoring and evaluation? Are these resources being allocated effectively?

    Stakeholder Engagement:

  • Project management: Has the project developed and leveraged the necessary and appropriate partnerships with direct and tangential stakeholders?

  • Participation and country-driven processes: Do local and national government stakeholders support the objectives of the project?  Do they continue to have an active role in project decision-making that supports efficient and effective project implementation?

  • Participation and public awareness: To what extent has stakeholder involvement and public awareness contributed to the progress towards achievement of project objectives?

    Reporting:

  • Assess how adaptive management changes have been reported by the project management and shared with the Project Board.

  • Assess how well the Project Team and partners undertake and fulfil GEF reporting requirements (i.e. how have they addressed poorly-rated PIRs, if applicable?)

  • Assess how lessons derived from the adaptive management process have been documented, shared with key partners and internalized by partners.

    Communications:

  • Review internal project communication with stakeholders: Is communication regular and effective? Are there key stakeholders left out of communication? Are there feedback mechanisms when communication is received? Does this communication with stakeholders contribute to their awareness of project outcomes and activities and investment in the sustainability of project results?

  • Review external project communication: Are proper means of communication established or being established to express the project progress and intended impact to the public (is there a web presence, for example? Or did the project implement appropriate outreach and public awareness campaigns?)

  • For reporting purposes, write one half-page paragraph that summarizes the project’s progress towards results in terms of contribution to sustainable development benefits, as well as global environmental benefits.

iv.   Sustainability

  • Validate whether the risks identified in the Project Document, Annual Project Review/PIRs and the ATLAS Risk Management Module are the most important and whether the risk ratings applied are appropriate and up to date. If not, explain why.

  • In addition, assess the following risks to sustainability:

Financial risks to sustainability:

  • What is the likelihood of financial and economic resources not being available once the GEF assistance ends (consider potential resources can be from multiple sources, such as the public and private sectors, income generating activities, and other funding that will be adequate financial resources for sustaining project’s outcomes)?

Socio-economic risks to sustainability:

  • Are there any social or political risks that may jeopardize sustainability of project outcomes? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership (including ownership by governments and other key stakeholders) will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained? Do the various key stakeholders see that it is in their interest that the project benefits continue to flow? Is there sufficient public / stakeholder awareness in support of the long term objectives of the project? Are lessons learned being documented by the Project Team on a continual basis and shared/ transferred to appropriate parties who could learn from the project and potentially replicate and/or scale it in the future?

Institutional Framework and Governance risks to sustainability:

  • Do the legal frameworks, policies, governance structures and processes pose risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project benefits? While assessing this parameter, also consider if the required systems/ mechanisms for accountability, transparency, and technical knowledge transfer are in place.

Environmental risks to sustainability:

  • Are there any environmental risks that may jeopardize sustenance of project outcomes?


Competencias

Corporate Competencies

  • Demonstrates integrity by modeling the UN’s values and ethical standards;
  • Promotes the vision, mission, and strategic goals of UNDP;
  • Displays cultural, gender, religion, race, nationality and age sensitivity and ?adaptability;
  • Treats all people fairly without favoritism.

Functional Competencies

Knowledge Management and Learning

  • Ability to provide top quality policy advice services on environmental issues;
  • In-depth practical knowledge of inter-disciplinary development issues.

Development and Operational Effectiveness

  • Ability to communicate effectively orally and in writing in order to communicate complex, ?technical information to technical and general audiences;
  • Skill in negotiating effectively in sensitive situations;
  • Skill in achieving results through persuading, influencing and working with others;
  • Skill in facilitating meetings effectively and efficiently and to resolve conflicts as they arise.

Management and Leadership

  • Focuses on impact and result for the client and responds positively to critical feedback;
  • Encourages risk-taking in the pursuit of creativity and innovation;
  • Consistently approaches work with energy and a positive, constructive attitude;
  • Demonstrates strong oral and written communication skills.


Habilidades y experiencia requeridas

Education:

  • Master’s degree in biodiversity conservations, natural resources management, sustainable development, sustainable tourism, or other closely related field.
  • Alternatively, they can hold a Bachelor degree in biodiversity conservations, natural resources management, sustainable development, sustainable tourism, or other closely related field, combined with at least 10 years of relevant professional experience.

Experience and Skills:

  • Proven experience with a positive track record in GEF project evaluations;
  • Project evaluation/review experiences within United Nations system will be considered an asset;
  • Recent experience with result-based management evaluation methodologies;
  • Experience applying SMART indicators and reconstructing or validating baseline scenarios;
  • Competence in adaptive management, as applied to biodiversity management and sector mainstreaming;
  • Experience working in Africa and/or insular countries;
  • Work experience in relevant technical areas for at least 10 years;
  • Demonstrated understanding of issues related to gender and biodiversity; experience in gender sensitive evaluation and analysis.
  • Excellent communication skills;
  • Demonstrable analytical skills;

Languages Required: 

  • English;
  • Spanish/Portuguese is a very strong asset.



Si está experimentando alguna dificultad con la solicitud de empleo en líneam puede ponerse en contacto con eRecruit Helpdesk

© 2016 Programas de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo